Exploring the reach and program use of hello world, an email-based health promotion program for pregnant women in the Netherlands

BMC Research Notes

Johannes Brug³  Hans AM van Oers²  Ivon EJ Milder¹  Mireille NM van Poppel⁴  Johanna M van Dongen¹ 

[1] Centre for Prevention and Health Services Research, National Institute for Public Health and the Environment, Antonie van Leeuwenhoeklaan 9, Bilthoven, 3721 MA, the Netherlands;Scientific Center for Care and Welfare, AB Tilburg University, Warandelaan 2, Tilburg, 5037, the Netherlands;Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the EMGO + Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, Van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, 1081 BT, the Netherlands;Department of Public and Occupational Health and the EMGO + Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Center, van der Boechorststraat 7, Amsterdam, 1081 BT, the Netherlands

关键词: Program engagement;    Reach;    Internet;    Health promotion;    Pregnancy;   

Others  :  1165646
DOI  :  10.1186/1756-0500-5-514

 received in 2012-02-20, accepted in 2012-09-20,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

In 2006, the Dutch government initiated Hello World, an email-based program promoting healthy lifestyles among pregnant women through quizzes with pregnancy-related questions. In 2008, an updated version was released.

The present study aimed to (1) examine the reach of Hello World and the representativeness of its users for all pregnant women in the Netherlands, (2) explore the relationship between program engagement and lifestyle characteristics, and (3) explore the relationship between the program content participants accessed (content on smoking, physical activity, and nutrition) and their lifestyle characteristics.

Methods

Data from 4,363 pregnant women were included. After registration, women received an online questionnaire with demographic and lifestyle questions. To evaluate their representativeness, their demographic characteristics were compared with existing data for Dutch (pregnant) women. Women were classified on the following lifestyle characteristics: smoking, nutrition, physical activity, and pre-pregnancy weight status. Program use was tracked and the relationships between lifestyle characteristics, program engagement, and the percentage of smoking, physical activity, and nutrition questions accessed after opening a quiz were explored using Mann–Whitney U tests and Kruskal-Wallis tests.

Results

Hello World reached ±4% of its target population. Ten percent of participants were low educated and 22% immigrants. On average, women received 6.1 (SD:2.8) quiz emails and opened 32% of the associated quizzes (2.0, SD:2.1). A significant positive association was found between the number of quizzes opened and the number of healthy lifestyle characteristics. After opening a quiz, women accessed most smoking, nutrition, and physical activity questions. Significant relationships were found between several lifestyle characteristics and the percentage of smoking, physical activity, and nutrition questions accessed. However, between-group differences were small, quiz topics were largely unrelated to their lifestyle characteristics, and inconsistencies were found regarding the directions of these associations.

Conclusions

Hello World reached ±4% of its target population, which is lower than the reach of its previous version (±8%). Relatively few low educated and immigrant women registered for the program. Active participation in the program was positively associated with the number of healthy behaviours participants engaged in. The program content participants chose to access was largely unrelated to their lifestyle characteristics.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 van Dongen et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Castles A, Adams EK, Melvin CL, Kelsch C, Boulton ML: Effects of smoking during pregnancy: five meta-analyses. Am J Prev Med 1999, 16:208-215.
• [2]Windham GC, Eaton A, Hopkin B: Evidence for an association between environmental tobacco smoke exposure and birthweight: a meta-analysis and new data. Paediatr Perinat Epidemiol 1999, 13:35-57.
• [3]Allen LH: Multiple micronutrients in pregnancy and lactation: an overview. Am J Clin Nutr 2005, 81:1206S-1212S.
• [4]Oken E, Levitan EB, Gillman MW: Maternal smoking during pregnancy and child overweight: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Obes (Lond) 2007, 32:201-210.
• [5]Heslehurst N, Simpson H, Ells LJ, Rankin J, Wilkinson J, Lang R, Brown TJ, Summerbell CD: The impact of maternal BMI status on pregnancy outcomes with immediate short-term obstetric resource implications: a meta-analysis. Obes Rev 2008, 9:635-683.
• [6]Roelands J, Jamison MG, Lyerly AD, James AH: Consequences of smoking during pregnancy on maternal health. J Womens Health (Larchmt) 2009, 18:867-872.
• [7]Jaddoe VW, Verburg BO, de Ridder MAJ, Hofman A, Mackenbach JP, Moll HA, Steegers EA, Witteman JC: Maternal smoking and fetal growth characteristics in different periods of pregnancy. Am J Epidemiol 2007, 165:1207-1215.
• [8]Health Council of the Netherlands: Richtlijnen goede voeding 2006 [Guidelines for a healthy diet 2006]. Den Haag; 2006.
• [9]Voedselconsumptiepeiling. Kerngetallen van de consumptie van groepen voedingsmiddelen in g/dag door diverse bevolkingsgroepen (inclusief nul-gebruikers). http://www.zuivelengezondheid.nl/tno/Index/Deel-1/b_tabel_09.PDF webcite
• [10]Statistics Netherlands. Health, lifestyle, and use of health care. http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=03799&D1=241-242,254,267-271&D2=0-2,4-5&D3=0&D4=0,6-9&HDR=G2,T&STB=G1,G3&VW=T webcite
• [11]van Zutphen M, Milder IE, Bemelmans WJ: Usage of an online healthy lifestyle program by pregnant women attending midwifery practices in Amsterdam. Prev Med 2008, 46:552-557.
• [12]Van’t Riet J, Crutzen R, De Vries H: Investigating predictors of visiting, using, and revisiting an online health-communication program: a longitudinal study. J Med Internet Res 2010, 12:e37.
• [13]Bennett GG, Glasgow RE: The delivery of public health interventions via the Internet: actualizing their potential. Annu Rev Public Health 2009, 30:273-292.
• [14]Brouwer W, Kroeze W, Crutzen R, de Nooijer J, de Vries NK, Brug J, Oenema A: Which intervention characteristics are related to more exposure to internet-delivered healthy lifestyle promotion interventions? A systematic review. J Med Internet Res 2011, 13:e2.
• [15]Bot M, Milder IEJ, Bemelmans WJE: Nationwide implementation of hello world: a Dutch email-based health promotion program for pregnant women. J Med Internet Res 2009, 11:e24.
• [16]Portnoy DB, Scott-Sheldon LAJ, Johnson BT, Carey MP: Computer-delivered interventions for health promotion and behavioral risk reduction: A meta-analysis of 75 randomized controlled trials, 1988−2007. Prev Med 2008, 47:3-16.
• [17]Cugelman B, Thelwall M, Dawes P: Online interventions for social marketing health behavior change campaigns: a meta-analysis of psychological architectures and adherence factors. J Med Internet Res 2011, 13:e17.
• [18]De Vries H, Mesters I, Riet J, Willems K, Reubsaet A: Motives of Belgian adolescents for using sunscreen: the role of action plans. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2006, 15:1360-1366.
• [19]Neve MJ, Collins CE, Morgan PJ: Dropout, nonusage attrition, and pretreatment predictors of nonusage attrition in a commercial Web-based weight loss program. J Med Internet Res 2010, 12:e69.
• [20]Linnan L, Steckler A: Process evaluation for public health interventions and research. An overview. San Fransico, CA: Jossey-Bass Incorporated Publishers; 2002:1-23. [Process evaluation for public health interventions and research]
• [21]Aaronson LS, Mural CM, Pfoutz SK: Seeking information: where Do pregnant women Go? Health Educ Q 1988, 15:335-345.
• [22]Bartholomew LK, Parcel GS, Kok G, Gottlieb NH: Planning health promotion programs. 2nd edition. San Fransisco; CA: Jossey Bass; 2006.
• [23]van Zutphen M, Milder IE, Bemelmans WJ: Integrating an eHealth program for pregnant women in midwifery care: a feasibility study among midwives and program users. J Med Internet Res 2009, 11:e7.
• [24]Statistics Netherlands: Definitions ethnicity. http://www.cbs.nl/nl-NL/menu/methoden/begrippen/default.htm?ConceptID=37 webcite
• [25]van den Brink CL, Ocké MC, Houben AW, van Nierop P, Doomers M: Validering van standaardvraagstelling voeding voor lokale en nationale monitor volksgezondheid [validation of a community health services food consumption questionnaire in theNetherlands] (in dutch RIVM rapport 260854008). Bilthoven: RIVM; 2005.
• [26]Statistics Netherlands: Statline. http://statline.cbs.nl/statweb/?LA=nl webcite
• [27]Statistics Netherlands: Child birth characteristics. http://statline.cbs.nl/StatWeb/publication/?DM=SLNL&PA=37422ned&D1=0,4-5,7,9,11,13,17,19,26,35,40-41&D2=0,10,20,30,40,55-59&HDR=G1&STB=T&VW=T webcite
• [28]Smit ES, Hoving C, Cox VCM, De Vries H: Influence of recruitment strategy on the reach and effect of a web-based multiple tailored smoking cessation intervention among Dutch adult smokers. Health Educ Res 2012, 27:191-199.
• [29]Headen IE, Davis EM, Mujahid MS, Abrams B: Racial-ethnic differences in pregnancy-related weight. Adv Nutr 2012, 3:83-94.
• [30]Levkoff S, Sanchez H: Lessons learned about minority recruitment and retention from the centers on minority aging and health promotion. Gerontologist 2003, 43:18-26.
• [31]Escobar-Chaves SL, Tortolero SR, Masse LC, Watson KB, Fulton JE: Recruiting and retaining minority women: findings from the women on the move study. Ethn Dis 2002, 12:242-251.
• [32]Clarke PE, Gross H: Women's behaviour, beliefs and information sources about physical exercise in pregnancy. Midwifery 2004, 20:133-141.
• [33]van den Berg G, van Eijsden M, Vrijkotte TGM, Gemke RJBJ: Educational inequalities in perinatal outcomes: the mediating effect of smoking and environmental tobacco exposure. PLoS One 2012, 7:e37002.
• [34]Mackenbach JP, Stirbu I, Roskam AJ, Schaap MM, Menvielle G, Leinsalu M, Kunst AE, European Union Working Group on Socioeconomic Inequalities in Health: Socioeconomic inequalities in health in 22 European countries. N Engl J Med 2008, 358:2468-2481.
• [35]Norris SA: Designing feasible interventions for healthy pregnancies in low-resource settings. Int J Gynecol Obstet 2011, 115(Supplement 1):S37-S40.
• [36]Wangberg SC, Bergmo RS, Johnson JK: Adherence in Internet-based intervention. Patient Pref Adherence 2008, 2:57-65.
• [37]Connor M, Norman P: Predicting health behaviour. 2nd edition. Berkshire: Open University Press; 2005.